Saturday 23 January 2021

"My Favourite Non-Fiction Reads Like Fiction:" What Makes a Non-Fiction Novel Good?



 Recently, I have really gotten into reading non-fiction books. Whether it's a celebrity autobiography, a humourous self-help book, or a poignant memoir, I just eat them up. I only really got into reading non-fiction novels last year, when I read Sissy by Jacob Tobia, a memoir that I absolutely loved. However, I have found that when I write positive reviews of non-fiction books, more often than not, the main positive trait that I put onto these books is that "they read like a fiction book." And I've come to wonder why this is. 

What do I mean when I say that a non-fiction book reads like fiction? To be honest, I had to ponder this myself. I think what I mean is, that the book uses poetic language, heavy with metaphor, making use of tone, to pull me into the story. There is not too much focus on statistics, or analytical writing. It doesn't feel like I'm reading a research paper, instead more like a creative writing piece. I guess these books have a stream of consciousness feel to them, so that I feel like I need to keep reading. However, I wonder why most of my non-fiction has to feel like fiction in order for me to receive it positively. Why can't it just be good non-fiction, without being compared to another genre? 

I bring this conversation up because I just finished an excellent non-fiction book, Hood Feminism by Mikki Kendall. This book is about the history of white feminism and its erasure of issues that affect marginalized people. I really enjoyed it. However, I would argue that it didn't read like a fiction novel. There were a lot of statistics and studies that were cited throughout the book. Kendall did share personal stories throughout the book, but overall it was less about her own life and more about a historical issue that she has meticulously researched and discusses at great length. This non-fiction book was great without being compared to fiction. And I think I need to break my reviewing habit of comparing non-fiction to fiction. 

I do tend to read more fiction that I do non-fiction. It is mostly because of personal preference, and because the main genre that I read is YA. However, this doesn't mean that I have to compare every other genre to fiction. Non-fiction is unique from fiction because it displays fact. It gives the opportunity for the author to include research and evidence that fiction novels do not always concern themselves with. Non-fiction authors do establish a unique voice, but they do so by how they choose to display and write about their facts. Non-fiction writers, like fiction writers, are educating the masses on a wide variety of issues. And they should be highlighted without the need to be compared to fiction. 

I think I need to change the way I review non-fiction. Yes, it is an important part of the reviewing process to highlight how the author writes. If they make use of great diction and metaphor that fiction writers commonly use, then that's awesome! But I don't think that the main positive point for non-fiction reviews (at least for me personally), should be that "it didn't feel like I was reading non-fiction." Because what's wrong with reading non-fiction? What's wrong with reading stats and facts? Certainly it's not everyone's personal taste, but that doesn't mean it's always a negative asset. I just think that when we compare non-fiction writers to fiction writers, we ignore the non-fiction writers who write very differently to fiction writers. And their work is still valid. 

Overall, I want to make a conscious decision to change the way I review non-fiction. Instead of just saying that a non-fiction book "read like fiction," I want to say that it was an extremely well-written, well-researched non-fiction book. And that is valid enough. 

Do you read non-fiction books? How do you review them? Do you agree/disagree with what I said? 

Emily @ Paperback Princess

16 comments:

  1. I'm really looking forward to reading Hood Feminism, so I'm happy you mentioned in here. I think I do the same thing when I read non-fiction - I don't just compare it to fiction, but I deliberately seek out non-fiction that I assume is going to be similar to fiction, e.g. biographies. I know I shouldn't do this, though because at the beginning of the year I read The Bookshop Book, which is all about bookshops around the world, and I *loved* it (especially as I haven't been in a bookshop for nearly a year at this point, lmao). It wasn't anything like a fictional novel and it clearly worked for me, so I hope I'll be able to seek out more non-fiction like this. Great post!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hope you're able to get to Hood Feminism! It was a great, informative book.

      A bookshop book sounds cool! That would normally be a book that I would never pick up, but of course we need to push ourselves to read outside of our comfort zone.

      Delete
  2. This was a really thoughtful post! I also recently just finished Hood Feminism by Mikki Kendall. I enjoyed it and felt that it read faster than some other nonfiction books because of how she weaved her personal experiences with the rest of the argument. In general I find that for me memoirs tend to read the fastest of nonfiction books because the pacing is still set in a narrator telling a story rather than referencing other texts or making an argument (not that memoirs don't make arguments either, but the personality behind them makes them not quite as dense for me). I've had to learn how to distinguish reviewing fiction and nonfiction in my head because nonfiction typically takes me much longer to read but, as you pointed out, that extended time because of additional statistics etc. doesn't necessarily make it bad, just different. When reviewing nonfiction, I now try to think about how effective the author was at crafting their argument/whether their use of statistics and evidence was understandable for a reader to be able to follow.
    claire @ clairefy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Claire! I'm glad you enjoyed Hood Feminism as well! I definitely agree with what you said about memoirs. The pacing is a lot more similar to fiction books because the text isn't broken up by stats. Overall, I would like to read more non-fiction that aren't memoirs this year. It's cool to learn something new and to not worry about whether it sounds like a story or not.

      Delete
  3. I don't read as much non- fiction as I used to- it must be due to blogging, I'm seeing so many recs and reviews now that I just keep grabbing fiction lol. I do like a good non- fiction though, especially biographies and really gripping accounts of historical events. And it can be tough to review those, because they're talking about real life events or facts. This is a great, thought provoking post, since I haven't read NF in so long, I'm not sure how I'd go about reviewing one. Hmm. Something to think about. :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Despite me loving history, I don't think I have ever picked up a historical non fiction book! I do think I should give on a go.

      Delete
  4. You make a very valid point. I mean, I'm not a non-fiction reader (I need to escape reality when I read, though I do appreciate fiction books that make a point about something), but I can see how one would be drawn to appreciate a NF book more if it imitated F, to the point of it influencing their review. It's great that you noticed that pattern and were able to make a conscious effort to change your way to look at NF!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, I tend to enjoy that escape from reality too. But I have read such gripping memoirs recently so I am definitely willing to explore the genre more.

      Delete
  5. What a thoughtful post, Emily! I‘ve picked up a lot of more non-fiction books lately too and it‘s so refreshing to overcome the stigma that non-fiction is boring on a personal level. Perhaps one of the reasons that we say that good non-fiction books read like fiction is that with fiction, we know it’s a construct of imagination — in the end we know we only read a reflection of reality. With non-fiction, real events and facts are built-in stakes that go beyond the pages....perhaps we can’t believe things really happen until we read it on paper and it’s the rush of emotions that reminds of fiction books. Just an excellent post, really!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Tessi! I think for me, I always viewed non-fiction books as being a little boring because of their association with school textbooks. But there are some fabulous information-heavy books out there! You make some really great observations.

      Delete
  6. Honestly? I think that when you say 'it reads like fiction' what you mean (imho) is - it's accessible to non-experts, and it's not pretentious. And those are both very important aspects of non-fiction.

    Some people have a tendency to big-up the densest and most incomprehensible non-fiction just to a) not let on that they don't get it either, and/or b) make themselves feel smart and superior. Sometimes things need to be technical - and that's fine, the nuclear technician needs to know wtf they're doing, after all - but when you're reviewing, you can't review from the perspective of a nuclear technician, so you need to review from a broader standpoint.

    ...At least that's what I think! ;) <3

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a very interesting point to make, Cee! I think that when I compare non-fiction to fiction, most of the time I'm just looking at form. In other words, does the non-fiction read like a story? But I never considered that it could also be a matter of the non-fiction simply being easy to read for someone who isn't an expert. I do think that good non-fiction has to be accessible. Thank you for bringing this up!

      Delete
  7. This is really insightful, Emily! I remember when I first read Devil in the White City by Erik Larson, I distinctly thought that it was a great nonfiction book because of how it was constructed like a fiction story (with time spent on implicitly describing setting and character traits). And while that's great, it isn't fair to measure all nonfiction books that way. For me, writing 'like fiction' increases accessibility to the layperson (like Cee said) except that seems to come from this idea that the layperson can't understand data and theories, discussed frankly, like in traditional nonfiction which isn't a great mindset to have. I think it's all about looking at a book's intended audience. That's the hard thing about rating books, I think, is that it's of course subjective but at the same time, being a reviewer, we try to be some kind of objective at the same time. I think there's definitely a difference between writing pretentiously (ugh I've definitely read things that fall into this category) and and writing 'dryly' (from the perspective of a reader of fiction). Anyway, all this to say this is a great discussion to have as it doesn't happen nearly often enough and it's really opened my eyes to my own methods of 'judging' nonfiction books!

    Laura @BlueEyeBooks

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Great points, Laura, and I'm glad you enjoyed the discussion! Yeah, reviewing is a tough job to have! I feel like when we dislike books we just want to get carried away ranting, but sometimes it's important to take a step back and carefully examine how we review.

      Delete
  8. I have always said this very same thing. Like you, I tend to prefer fiction, and I definitely prefer non-fiction that's in the form of a memoir or something along those lines, not books filled with facts and figures. Still, I agree that those books have an important place---maybe someday I'll get better about reading them.

    Nicole @ Feed Your Fiction Addiction

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, I'm hoping I will explore the genre of non-fiction a bit more in depth!

      Delete